Skip to main content

About your Search

20121006
20121014
STATION
CSPAN 10
CSPAN2 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 13
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13
in 1986 but are staring us in the face today. first, a much larger and much more dangerous deficit and second, a dramatic increase been income and inequality. old-style tax reform could make both conditions worse. but don't dismiss the old framework lightly. credit for the 1986 reform law belongs to democrats like bill bradley in the senate. just as much as to president reagan. as a member of the house back then, i not only voted for it, but i whipped the votes to make sure it passed. i was on the committee set up by dan rostenkowski to get it done. the approach made a good deal of sense at the time. then, as now, the code was littered with egregious loopholes that needed to be reformed. recall the so-called passive law schools that were in place back then. they allowed wealthy taxpayers to gain the system. someone could invest in a bowling alley and then, if the bowling alley lost money, they could take a write off many times larger than their initial money incestment of their entire income tax liability. we need to get rid of such a gimmicky tax shelter. paring these loopholes al
, the problem of running deficits and accumulating greater debt, that the country had a budget deficit, a trade deficit, a balance of payments deficit, and the fourth one you brought up was a leadership deficit. >> leadership is the greatest. >> can i ask you both, describe what is the problem with what appears to be in your mind a leadership deficit, that we're not getting the leadership on this key issue either from this president or past presidents, this congress or pass congresses/ what does it take to get elected officials to tackle at an issue, increasing their taxes? >> let's start with the families. they will get their attention. the voters have to understand all this, which they did not, and voters need to understand what we have to do to get all this corrected, and they do not. if we ever get that over to the voters, they will vote for the people who are geared up, ready, and know how to do it and are running on that basis, and then we can change this country forever and get us back to where we used to be when i was a boy in the depression. why schoolteachers and would have been docto
means blowing up the deficit or raising taxes on middle-class families. one or the other. pick your poison. last week, mitt romney said, there is no addition to the deficit with my tax plan. if he says it is not true, then it is not true. ok. it is true that it is not going to add to the deficit, that leaves only one option. that is asking middle-class families to foot the bill by getting rid of the deductions for owning a home, raising kids, or sending them to college. as it turned out, most folks do not like that idea either. just last week, on stage, governor romney decided that instead of changing his plan, he would pretended did not exist. what $5 trillion tax cut? i do not know anything about that tax cut. pay no attention to the tax cut under the carpet, behind the curtain. when he was asked how he would cut the deficit, he said he could make the math work by eliminating local public funding for pbs. by the way, this is not new. this is what he has been saying every time he is asked a question. we can cut out pbs. for all you moms and kids out there, do not worry. somebody is
, in 2010 a bipartisan federal commission unveiled the plan to cut the nation's deficit by $4 trillion through a mix of tax increases and spending cuts. the plan was never voted on in congress. do you agree with any or all with what the commission came up with? what other efforts do you think the country needs to take on to cut the country's debt, which now exceeds $16 trillion? >> debt and our deficit are very important issues that we need to tackle and they're a matter of national security. and this is one of the starkest contrasts between congresswoman bono mack and myself. you see, congresswoman bono mack wants to put the deficit and the burden of our debt on the shoulders of our seniors, our middle class and our students. by turning medicare into a private voucher system and charging our seniors $6,000 a year for their health care costs on average, by cutting pell grants and stafford loans who rely on those for their college education and she's voted to increase taxes on the middle class through the ryan plan. all of this in order to keep tax breaks for multi-millionaires and tax
years later left with massive deficits. during his time in the senate, the national debt went up by $16,000. he conceded that spending was a problem in the senate. we also have people who need to know how to work together. i learned to cut crime bills and the economy. my opponent said his job was to not democrats softly. he took this similar position in the senate, fighting efforts led by the then-senior virginia senator. when someone who will fight and that is what i will do is your next to none state senator. >> if mr. allen, your opening statement. >> thank you. it's much better future than what we are having to endure these days. that is why i put forward a detailed plan. my blueprint for america to get an economy and stronger jobs. the question is which one of us can be accounted upon. you may have read an article that was comparing our two governorships. the call me when the most accomplished modern governors with major improvements in public education, safety, welfare reform, and i described how worked with leaders in the other party to get results for the people. the bad economy
spending cuts and we need to be talking about increasing revenues. it takes both to close the deficit. we both submitted our economic proposals to the boston globe. they were sent out four independent economic analysis. what the independent economists found is that i was 67% more effective at cutting the deficit then senator brown. why? because i am willing to make cuts. i am willing to make substantial cuts. i support substantial cuts. i also believe we have to raise revenues. that is what it will take to get serious about our deficit. i truly believe on this one, this is about our children and grandchildren. we cannot leave it to our grandchildren to pay off our debts. >> great question. we are in the $16 trillion national debt. we are in another trillion dollar deficit. you cannot keep borrowing to pay our bills. when we are talking about cutting military spending, we have party cut in half a trillion dollars. that affects many people in this room and people watching. i have been battling as a member of the arms services committee to try to find the resources to protect our men and wom
of $3 trillion in deficit reductions, which is some combination of tax revenue and spending cuts. therein lies the problem. we have a situation where democrats have been loath to to target the deep spending cuts to domestic programs an impediment programs that would be needed to cut a deal, -- entitlement programs that would be needed to cut a deal, and republicans are loath to consider the idea of any sort of new tax revenue that could be added to the picture. so, how do you put this deal together in no way that makes a policy sense, but also would satisfy the political differences on either side? it really is difficult. if you look to the projections, people say if we do not do anything, this would be great for the nation put the deficit, because tax revenues would automatically go up, spending would go down, and our national deficit would nearly be cut in half. that is a great outcome. yes, it is, but the other hand, the economy, which is in a fragile state, would decline, and we've seen projections of a 0.5% reduction in gdp growth which experts say would put the economy in a
not reach a deal cutting the deficit. jpmorgan is being sued at the new york attorney general over allegations that subsidiary bear stearns deceived investors into buying mortgage-backed securities. this is an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> well, good afternoon. i am richard haass and i want to welcome all of you to the council on foreign relations into today's ceo speaker series meeting. this is part of the council on foreign relations corporate programs, which is supposed to increase connections and links between the business community in the foreign policy community, which to some extent are one and the same. i want to thank -- rather welcome not necessarily those of you do, but those around the world participating in this meeting or modern technology. speaking of modern technology, if people take a second to turn off their cell phones and the like, that would be most welcome. this meeting is on the record. as we say, anything can and will i'm sure be against you. in this danish, probably some things you haven't said will be used against you. the phrase for someone it's no
campaign stop in new hampshire was talking about the threat of deficit spending. it's probably something you might hear tonight at the vice- presidential debate. here's a preview. [video clip] >> we cannot keep borrowing 36 cents of every dollar our government spends. we cannot keep the federal reserve doing what. we cannot keep looking our children in the eye, knowing that we are going to give them a diminished future because we are spending their money today. it's a very simple idea. mitt romney and i will bring it to washington. we've got to stop spending money we don't have. we must cut spending. we must get this balanced budget. we must get this debt under control. this debt not only hurts our economy today with the threat of higher interest rates and a losing a dollar and much higher tax rates. we know that we are giving the students here at this academy, our children and grandchildren, a lower standard of living. we've never done that in this country before. host: vice-presidential candidate paul ryan in new hampshire at a recent event. here's what you might hear from the vice-pre
where we can compromise and come to the middle and we must do that. we have a huge deficit and like i said earlier, a little amnesia how we got there but we are there and we have to deal with this. it's a must do and for the good of the country and same as senator, as tom, excuse me. i didn't mean to relegate you to senator. but i have children and grandchildren and we have got to do some things right for the future of this country. it's a privilege for us, all of us in this country. >> moderator: along those same lines congress and boswell what is the most important things that you think, the most important thing congress can do that would stimulate job growth or lift the overall economy? boswell: right now we are an agriculture stated we are much more. we are certainly in agriculture state and we don't have a farm bill. it comes up every five years and it's very important to iowa and all of the crop bearing fire for producing states in the middle was an across the country. we have to have a farm bill and there have been political posturing. the speaker -- mr. latham's best friend i'
and creating jobs. >> your also worried about the deficit. clearly america has large and ever-growing deficits. the proposed a tax cut. that is defecit spending. >> this is a two-step deal. everybody knows we need the big deal. we talk about that and 30 seconds. we're not going to get to the big deal by jumping off the bridge. what we're saying is that it is not the right thing to do to have the largest tax increase in the history of america and to have up $1.20 trillion worth of spending cuts that do not even look at medicare and medicaid across the board without thinking through what is the deal is going to be. anybody from either party should come to a realization that the big deal counts. all we need to do is get a small part of an extension. when you talk about these taxes and spending, it cannot be done by 10 people in the back room. it has to be done in normal order. they are the only people that understand what you're in those bills. >> to and if you really think we're going to jump off a fiscal cliff? >> i think it is at least that the tax cut scheduled to expire to expire. maybe slig
to explain it and explain how they're not going to explode the deficits and put a big new burden on the middle class. >> we see a number of battleground stake polls out this morning including those by cbs news and "the new york times" that show a tightening of the contest in several of these states. can joe biden tonight stop the slide in the polls for president obama? >> well, nora, i don't think there's a slide in the polls. i think there was a bump after the debate. i think it was mostly last weekend. as you know, these polls that you conducted don't measure the days since the debate, they measure what happened from before the debate to after. so i don't think there's big momentum. there's no doubt that governor romney collected a couple of points, mostly of republican leaning independents as a result of the last debate. what i think the vice president can do is really drive home the fact that one candidate, the president, has a vision that has squarely in it the interest of the middle class and the notion that you build the economy through the middle class and through a stron
for 10% of the deficit spending increases. lower tax rates across the board and close loopholes. we have three bottom lines. do not raise the deficit, do not raise taxes on the middle class, do not lower the share that is borne by the high income earners. it has been discredited by six other studies and even their own deputy campaign manager acknowledged that it was not correct. >> let's talk about this. you have refused to offer specifics on how you would pay for that 20% across the board. do you actually have the specifics or are you still working on it? >> different than this administration, we want to have a big bipartisan agreement. >> do you have the specifics? >> look at what ronald reagan and tip o'neill did. we raise about $1.20 trillion through income taxes. we forgo about $1.10 trillion in loopholes and deductions. deny those loopholes and deductions to higher income tax payers. so we can lower tax rates across the board. >> i hope i am going to get time to respond. >> we want to work with congress on how best to achieve this. >> no specifics. >> lower tax rate 20%. start with
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13